Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 958 posts

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#721

Post by Siira »

simonh wrote: post #227
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One fact that has emerged is that Apple is pushing lock-in as a strategy. So to everyone who has ever felt like they are too "invested" in the ecosystem to leave- that is by design. You are victims.

How dare they make their systems work so well together and easy to use.

As if anyone would have needed that if interoperable standards with FOSS implementations were around.

It’s 2021 and there is still no file system that is safe, and works on both macOS and Windows.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#722

Post by avianlyric »

msbarnett wrote: post #660
woko wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how this works in favour of Apple. Imagine you had paid with any other third-party payment provider, e.g. Paypal. Wouldn't you have been able to cancel the recurring payment just as easily? Even with a CC payment, wouldn't you be able to cancel the recurring payment by going through the account options on your bank website?

> Even with a CC payment, wouldn't you be able to cancel the recurring payment by going through the account options on your bank website? No? I don't know where you're located, but I'm not aware of any North American banks that offer anything of the sort. Typically the only thing you could do through your bank is dispute a charge after the fact and request a chargeback. The end of that process may or may not see the…

Which is strange considering that both Mastercard and Visa require banks to offer this feature, and provide services to make it easy to implement.

I suspect if you called up your bank and asked to block recurring payments from a specific merchant, they could do it. It’s just not advertised very well, and the implementation aren’t always granular enough (block a merchant using Stripe for example, can result in all Stripe payments being blocked).

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#724

Post by justapassenger »

eropple wrote: post #298
acdha wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing is no customer wants to use any company's half-assed bug-riddled purchase or subscription system. Every iOS and macOS user will prefer to use the Apple system. The first sentence is true but incomplete, making the second wrong. For example, the Amazon app is highly likely to have people using their existing Amazon payment method. Companies like Stripe are going to offer their own SDKs just like they do fo…

Companies will want it, but I'm not sure users will. Apple does a really good job of warning me, I feel, and centralizing subscription cancellation etc., and that's huge. Like, if I have to go to your app--or worse, your website--to cancel a subscription? I'm gonna just not use your stuff, because I'm going to forget about it until you whack me for another year or whatever.

If I'm buying a subscription/app from a sketchy dev, sure, I'll happily to default to use Apple, as it's providing me real value in terms of protection.

But for buying stuff from trustworthy providers, like Netflix or Amazon, etc, then why should I give Apple their cut? They give me 0 extra benefits, as I don't need protection from those companies. They're as likely to mess with me as Apple.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#725

Post by bartwe »

acdha wrote: post #366
eropple wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies will want it, but I'm not sure users will. Apple does a really good job of warning me, I feel, and centralizing subscription cancellation etc., and that's huge. Like, if I have to go to your app--or worse, your website--to cancel a subscription? I'm gonna just not use your stuff, because I'm going to forget about it until you whack me for another year or whatever.

You'll get no argument from me that Apple's system is pretty good from a consumer standpoint — that's the primary reason why I predicted that it'd remain popular. It's really nice knowing that you can nuke a subscription without getting some dark patterns trying to talk you out of it. On the other hand, it's really easy to imagine that you'd see something like “$9.99 IAP; $7.99 direct from Epic/Amazon/Google/Netflix/…

They're not allowed to offer it lower price direct.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#726

Post by dotproto »

shagie wrote: post #686
falafel_muncher wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most developers will happily just opt for Apple's system if the rates make sense The _buyer_ experience with Apple's IAP is mostly good, but I would argue that the developer experience is downright horrible. Working with subscriptions and IAP receipts is clunky. You can only use one of about 100 SKUs, which makes it difficult to offer discounts and customized pricing at the higher price tiers, where the gaps betwee…

> Even if Stripe charged 30%, I would choose them every time over Apple's IAP. Note that Apple is charging 15% for small developers ( https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/11/apple-announces-app-s... ) - not 30%. Stripe's rates are $0.30 + 3% ( https://stripe.com/pricing ). Paypal is a quite a bit better at $0.09 + 5% for micropayments. For a $0.99 IAP through Apple (with all of the associated infrastructure to handle…

> Note that Apple is charging 15% for small developers ( https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/11/apple-announces-app-s... ) - not 30%.

Defaults matter. Based on what they've shared so far developers must qualify for and choose to enroll in this system. In other words, Apple isn't charging 15% for small businesses, they're charging 15% for Small Business Program participants. That's an important distinction.

It's also worth mentioning that if you have transferred an app to or from your developer account for any reason, you're not eligible for this program. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/small-business-program...

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#728

Post by scarface74 »

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #3

Personally, I am surprised at all the anti-competitive actions Apple has been able to get away with over the years: Bundling the OS with hardware Enforcing an App store Dictating/Castrating Browser on mobile And the list goes on. I'm not saying this as a ding on Apple products, because I genuinely appreciate them, but I think at the same time Apple has resorted to creating roadblocks rather than innovating.

Would you prefer that a judge forces a company to support other hardware?

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#729

Post by syspec »

From: https://9to5mac.com/2021/09/10/epic-games-to-appeal-decision...

> Epic Games has announced that it plans to appeal the judge’s decision from today’s Epic v. Apple case. Although today’s ruling says that Apple must relax rules around In-App Purchase and allow apps to link out to third-party payment systems, the judge ruled in Apple’s favor on all other counts.

> For instance, Apple was not shown to have a monopoly nor must be compelled to allow third-party app stores or alternative third-party payment systems inside the app itself, as Epic had hoped. In a statement, Apple described the decision as a “huge win for Apple”.

Re: Court issues permanent injunction in Epic vs. Apple case

#730

Post by veilrap »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #248
barkerja wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My concern is less about random one-off purchases but more the management of on-going subscriptions. Having Apple handle that, is a blessing, from a user perspective. I have a single place to manage all the random $1 - $10 subscriptions that I have, making it easy to change/cancel at any moment's notice, and from any device.

What is to stop you from searching for services that still let you use Apple Pay? No one is stopping you from living in your tight-knit Apple world, but you seem discontent with the idea that people will no longer have to live there and would rather find ways to force them to stay there with you.

Maybe those users would be better off with the more popular products offered by Apple's competitors.
Post reply on HN